Times Colonist

Trans Mountain approval favoured Alberta: lawyer for B.C. government

- CAMILLE BAINS The Canadian Press

VANCOUVER — A lawyer representi­ng British Columbia in its fight against the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion says the federal cabinet’s approval of the project is “lopsided” because it put Alberta’s economic needs ahead of B.C.’s concerns about oil spills.

Thomas Berger said outside the Federal Court of Appeal on Thursday that the $7.4-billion project would disproport­ionately affect the interests of B.C. residents in the event of a marine spill of diluted bitumen.

While Alberta would get the lion’s share of benefits through developmen­t of its oil resources and access to Pacific Rim markets, B.C. would bear the environmen­tal risk, he told the Canadian Press in an interview.

In its approval of the project last November, the federal cabinet breached its statutory duty to provide reasons for deciding it was not likely to cause significan­t adverse environmen­tal effects, Berger said on behalf of the attorney general of B.C., which is an intervener in the case.

“The governor in council [federal cabinet] made its choice but it did not give any reasons. All we got was the conclusion. It’s like getting a judge’s verdict without getting any reasons,” Berger said.

“I urged the court to rule that the cabinet had to obey the command of Parliament, which is the order-in-council must set out the reasons for making the order,” the former B.C. Supreme Court judge said.

“I told the court: ‘This isn’t technical, it’s fundamenta­l,’ ” Berger said.

The federal government’s explanator­y note accompanyi­ng the order-in-council approving Trans Mountain says detailed reasons for the decision are set out in four reports, including one by the National Energy Board.

“The citizen shouldn’t have to search through hundreds of documents to find out the reason why the cabinet made the choice it did,” Berger said. “That’s why Parliament said cabinet’s reasons must be set out in the order-incouncil.”

Alberta, which favours the pipeline project on the grounds it would create jobs and investment opportunit­ies, is scheduled to make its arguments in the Federal Court of Appeal next week.

Several First Nations, two environmen­tal groups and the cities of Vancouver and Burnaby are also against the pipeline expansion that the federal government approved last November.

Indigenous groups have maintained a seven-fold increase in tanker traffic would substantia­lly increase the risks of diluted bitumen spills, with no known means of adequately cleaning it up, and put endangered southern resident killer whales in peril.

First Nations groups also say the federal government failed to adequately consult with them or gain their consent for expanding the pipeline.

Trans Mountain, a subsidiary of Kinder Morgan Canada, aims to double an existing Alberta-toB.C. pipeline with about 1,000 more kilometres of pipeline in new and existing corridors.

British Columbia’s former Liberal government supported the project, saying it met five government conditions, including a revenue-sharing agreement worth up to $1 billion.

 ??  ?? Opponents of the proposed Trans Mountain pipeline expansion rally this week in Vancouver outside the Federal Court of Appeal.
Opponents of the proposed Trans Mountain pipeline expansion rally this week in Vancouver outside the Federal Court of Appeal.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada